Eharmony SUCKS! Class action lawsuit underway!

[gadgetlady 4]

Brand new research is cropping up now regarding hormones in the womb and homosexuality. Compelling scientific evidence.

I'd love to read about this. Can you point me to some studies? TIA!

[Sunta 4]

Gadgetlady:

The Science Of Sexual Orientation, Researchers Focus On Twins - CBS News

This whole article is outstanding and thought-provoking. Pay particular attention to page 4-5 which discusses hormones in particular. A researcher is able to turn male rats into performing female sexual behaviors and vice-versa, just by exposing them to hormones before birth.

This would also explain the Gay (or like-sexed) behaviors observed in over 1,400 animal species, as well as Gay behavior in humans. I think this is crucially important research and I hope to hear alot more about this in days to come.

One big issue I have with the article though, is in the discussion of the identical twins where one acts like a girl and the other like a boy, is that the article fails to differentiate between "Gay" and "transgendered." The little boy in the article is most likely transgendered, and not Gay, in my opinion.

Other than that, it's a very interesting article.

[gadgetlady 4]

Gadgetlady:

The Science Of Sexual Orientation, Researchers Focus On Twins - CBS News

This whole article is outstanding and thought-provoking. Pay particular attention to page 4-5 which discusses hormones in particular. A researcher is able to turn male rats into performing female sexual behaviors and vice-versa, just by exposing them to hormones before birth.

This would also explain the Gay (or like-sexed) behaviors observed in over 1,400 animal species, as well as Gay behavior in humans. I think this is crucially important research and I hope to hear alot more about this in days to come.

One big issue I have with the article though, is in the discussion of the identical twins where one acts like a girl and the other like a boy, is that the article fails to differentiate between "Gay" and "transgendered." The little boy in the article is most likely transgendered, and not Gay, in my opinion.

Other than that, it's a very interesting article.

Thank you. I will read it later when I can better focus my attention.

[OH Juli 15]

Sunta-

You rock! Thanks for being eloquent when I was so angry I couldn't type.

Juli

[BJean 16]

Good grief, how did I get aligned with people who make such nasty comments about the competition...

Sunta your point is very well taken. I am a small business owner and although I fully obey the laws, and never intend to break them, I got this mental picture of someone telling me that I HAD to do business with someone who I did not want to do business with, for whatever reason. It has nothing to do with sexual preference, or anything specific, for that matter.

I fully support anti-discrimination policies in the work force. I just hate the idea of big brother looking over my shoulder and deciding that I have to buy my office coffee from one particular bean processor or other. Guess I was thinking in much too simple terms.

Personally I can't imagine discriminating against someone for their sexual preference, whether the preference is by choice or by "intelligent design."

[Carlene 12]

The fact is, the Eharmony policy violates laws that are already in place for anti-discrimination, so the argument isn't "should we refuse to serve so-and-so" it's "should we make sure anti-discrimnation laws are enforced". If you don't think they should be enforced, then in essence you support Jim-Crow type laws: seperate but equal.

With regard to people with piercings and neo Natzi's, they have chosen to be such things, while Gays have not. No one should be discriminated against because of who they are from birth.

Brand new research is cropping up now regarding hormones in the womb and homosexuality. Compelling scientific evidence. The day is coming very, very soon, when it will be proven that being Gay is not a choice, and the poor right wingers will be out of business. Soon, that theory will sit right beside "the earth is 6,000 years old" theory.

Sunta....

I absolutely support gay/lesbian rights, including the right to marry, but I disagree that the eharmony policy is any more discriminatroy that the gay dating site (outinamerica???). They offer only "man looking for men" and "woman looking for women" options - no hetros allowed, one assumes. Also, there is a Lady USA Fitness club down the street from my house. It does not allow men. Is that ok? Another health club in my are is "Fit and 50", which restricts membershp to those 50 and over. AARP? You have to be 50 to join. I have insurance (auto and homeowners) thru AAA, but they won't sell you insurance unless you are a member of the AAA Auto Club. The list goes on and on and on. These are all businesses, but you can't purchase their services unless you meet their criteria. I don't see the difference, but please enlighten me if you think I am wrong.

[Sunta 4]

Sunta....

I absolutely support gay/lesbian rights, including the right to marry, but I disagree that the eharmony policy is any more discriminatroy that the gay dating site (outinamerica???). They offer only "man looking for men" and "woman looking for women" options - no hetros allowed, one assumes. Also, there is a Lady USA Fitness club down the street from my house. It does not allow men. Is that ok? Another health club in my are is "Fit and 50", which restricts membershp to those 50 and over. AARP? You have to be 50 to join. I have insurance (auto and homeowners) thru AAA, but they won't sell you insurance unless you are a member of the AAA Auto Club. The list goes on and on and on. These are all businesses, but you can't purchase their services unless you meet their criteria. I don't see the difference, but please enlighten me if you think I am wrong.

Ok, let's see. The first example is Lady USA Fitness. Technically they would be discriminating against men, right? I don't believe that men fall under a protected class in the anti-discrimination law. In fact I think that men are not generally discriminated against in our society. Secondly, the reason for having only women at the club is specifically so that they can feel comfortable working out without the fear of being stared at. I don't think any such similar concept would apply at Eharmony. Adding Gay people would not affect straight people in any way. They could still go on picking other opposite-gendered people and dating in the exact same way. So I don't really see a correlation there. Besides, I don't USA Lady Fitness is the biggest gym in the United States (I've never even heard of it) whereas Eharmony is one of the largest dating sites out there and as such would be considered to offer more programs and services to its clients.

The second example is "Fit and 50". I'm assuming that this gym offers very different services to people 50 and over than would a "normal" gym. The exercise programs would probably not be appropriate for younger people who are looking to lose weight or meet fitness goals. Therefor there is a specific and valid reason for restricting membership to those 50 and older. No such similar valid reason applies at Eharmony. Their argument about "not having developed the research" is nonsense. Gay people are no different from straight people in terms of who they would be compatible with (after the gender thing, of course!)

The Triple AAA example I think is the most far out one, because they are not restricting based on who a person is, but based on membership in a previous club. So I don't think that example applies at all.

But the main point is, none of these examples show restriction to people who are protected under the law, which Eharmony is doing.

So to sum up:

1. None of the examples include people protected under anti-discrimination laws.

2. None of the examples include minorities (which is why they tend to not need protection)

3. All of the examples show excellent and compelling, sensible reasons why they are operating the way that they do.

4. None of the examples are the "biggest and best" club or service, as Eharmony is.

Believe me, if there were tons of huge, inexpensive online Gay dating services that had the exposure Eharmony does (in advertising), it most likely would not be an issue.

[Carlene 12]

4. None of the examples are the "biggest and best" club or service, as Eharmony is.

Believe me, if there were tons of huge, inexpensive online Gay dating services that had the exposure Eharmony does (in advertising), it most likely would not be an issue.

Is Eharmony the "biggest and best"? I thought the biggest was Match.com, which does allow gay searches, does it not? Also, I think AOL, MSN and Yahoo do, too. Those are all big name dating sites.

What about the gay dating site....is it allowed to practice discrimination solely because it represents a minority group?

[Misfit699 0]

From what I have seen on this topic, Eharmony does not disallow you to

join their site, if they did I would agree they were in the wrong, all they do is not have the product you are looking for ie men for men/ woman

for woman.

[susannah 2]

Very, very true, but if you go to the Ritz-Carlton you don't expect your concierge to have a nose ring and pink hair. And I doubt the Ritz-Carlton would hire someone who did. They might be turning down a great employee, but they still wouldn't do it.

Honestly does it really matter if a hotel employee has a nose ring and pink hair if they are wearing a suit and look presentable? I personally could care less. In 2007, I think as a society we have bigger fish to fry to be honest.

Susannah

[OH Juli 15]

Carlene-

Outinamerica asks your gender and your sexual orientation. So you could easily enter female and straight.

It doesn't only have man seeking man or woman seeking woman. And how it's listed when you go to seek is by your gender and your sexual orientation. There are males, females, male to female trans and female to male trans as far as gender goes. There are straight, lesbian, bi, gay and curious as far as sexual orientation goes.

So me, back when I was on the market I skipped all the males, all the bis all the curious, all the trans and looked at the girls who dig girls. You could go there and hunt for the straight men. I doubt you'd find them, but catagorically there is room for them.

And the idea of reverse descrimination, which I think you are talking about, just doesn't hold Water. Because though minorities can be anti-majority, they don't hold the sway or the power that the majority have. They can scream and kick and say you can't come to our party but until they get to critical mass there's not much they can do.

It's like an ant kicking the toe of a human. The ant can be angry, mean and indignant, but the human has size and power on their side and can easily squash the ant.

Being part of the majority, for me it's being white, it's hard to step aside and allow for other expressions without thinking something is being taken from me. (I'm so not used to having things taken from me!) I've been places where whites have been excluded and at first it felt uncomfortable, but when I got the "aha" moment, I realized other people deserve to be free of a place where the majority is looking in.

Juli

[Carlene 12]

Carlene-

Outinamerica asks your gender and your sexual orientation. So you could easily enter female and straight.

It doesn't only have man seeking man or woman seeking woman.

Juli

Am I missing something? I went to their site and the only options were "man seeking men" and "woman seeking women".

Reverse discrimination is still discrimination, IMHO. Leveling the playing field is one thing, but giving unfair advantage is not the same thing. I do not support Affirmative Action or "quotas" for race, gender, etc. I do support civil rights, particularly the right to marry whomever you like, regardless of gender (or race).

The thing that bothers me most about the Eharmony suit is that it targets a privately owned business, and I do not like to see government telling business owners how to run their own business, without regard to the effect on profit margin, viability, practicality, etc. It just does not fit my profile of American justice.

And I don't think gay/lesbian individuals seriously want to join Eharmony's dating service. I think they are just trying to make a point. But on another level, I hate that guy who does Eharmony's commercials (and presumably started the whole site), so I wouldn't really be upset if they lost.

Where I live they have a number of Christian singles groups, and some that are specific to one denomination (primarily Jews or Catholics). I don't think anyone has threatened to sue them for discrimination, but I guess it could happen. The group I belonged to when I met my DH was called "Mid Cities Catholic Singles". At some point they allowed people to join who were not Catholic, which was fine, but then some of those people started complaining about the name and wanting to change it to just plain "Mid Cities Singles". I thought that was rather presumptuous of them. So maybe my Eharmony opinion has been colored by that experience.

PS...it annoys me sometimes that I have to drag my 87 year old MIL with me to stores that give a senior citizen discount because I'm not yet 62. So I guess it's human nature to want it all!

[Sunta 4]

What about the gay dating site....is it allowed to practice discrimination solely because it represents a minority group?

As I said before in another post, I don't think it's right for any dating service to discriminate based on sexual orientation, period.

[gadgetlady 4]

Honestly does it really matter if a hotel employee has a nose ring and pink hair if they are wearing a suit and look presentable? I personally could care less. In 2007, I think as a society we have bigger fish to fry to be honest.

Susannah

Quite frankly, I could care less, too. My point was that the Ritz-Carlton doesn't hire people like that and it's not illegal that they don't.

[AshevilleEddie 14]

I've been out of the dating scene for almost a decade, but I have to agree that reverse discrimination is just as wrong as any other form. However, as a Gay white male I've felt the privilege that accompanies being white and male, as well as the sting of being despised and discriminated against for being Gay. Discrimination in any form should not be allowed to exist in civilized society. It's just no different than separate bathrooms/water fountains for whites and "colored." So while I don't agree with reverse discrimination, I do understand why people feel the need to employ those tactics - it's because those same tactics have been employed against them for years.

As for the issue of Gay & Lesbian people causing every bad thing except global warming (of course, I'm sure there's someone out there who believes that too), that argument is full of shit. My husband and I have two kids, own a home, an RV and a business. We pay out the ass for our domestic partner insurance benefits as they are considered "imputed income" and we have to pay taxes on them! PLUS, since we can't file joint tax returns, we both pay taxes, effectively doubling our taxes. Talk about discrimination. And you think we're causing you to pay more for your health insurance?? And the disintegration of the family? How about the fact that people who think like you do are trying as hard as possible to disintegrate my family by not allowing my husband and I to legally marry? And yes, we are husbands, whether legal or not and whether you like it or not. When I have the same rights as you, then you can talk to me about discrimination...